Vandersteen 5a or Eggleston Andra II

Just for the record, I didn't send any emails on this subject. I have heard the Egglestons and the Vandys in THE SAME SYSTEM and their respective "leagues" were definitely the same. Now, given matches and/or mismatches of components, one of these pairs may sound better than the other in that particular system to a particular set of ears. In fact, I have heard the Egglestons take the edge in one system while the Vandys were clearly superior in another. All I am saying is that this comes down to preferences and sage component matching.

Offering the "different league" statement, one would expect to find one speaker besting the other in all settings and by a significant margin. And, I'll wager my system that if you assembled 20 folks without an agenda and did a blind test, this would not be the case, at all. Fine that you like the Egglestons, but I still say that claiming them to be in a different league than the Vandys is just plain silly. But, whatever, I mostly responded again such that others would not think that your claim of receiving emails from unnamed sources did not include me.

I would. He used to use wilson's. very different.

What is so wrong with Wilson's are they weird too?

mastering peopole have some weird systems. Doug sax has a system I can;t make any sense out of.

I agree that the audio industry has it's share of eccentrics.

However, are you suggesting that you don't trust/respect the choices of successful mastering engineers that are demanded by top artists and top producers for their critical listening/mastering skills?

Are you suggesting that when they master CD's/SACD's on these speakers that you can dramatically improve on the sound they produce by using another speaker at home?

What would you recommend that is so much better than Bob Ludwig's tailored $100,000 Eggelston Ivy's?

If you say that their taste is for too detailed and precise of a presentation and that you prefer a laid back warm colored sound ....then I understand completely and you have a good point.

Mothra,

I was intrigued by you "weird" and Wilsons comment and tried to find out what other weird speakers Bob Ludwig might have used. I found nothing on Wilsons, although it is hardly suprising that he would indeed like high end Wilsons. Why not?

Here is what I did find;

Bob Ludwig Nov 25 1997, 3:00 am show options
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
From: "Bob Ludwig" - Find messages by this author
Date: 1997/11/25
Subject: Re: Opinions Wanted Re: ATC20 & ATC50 Active Monitors
Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse

Dear Gregory,

I use the ATC50s at home and I like them a lot.
At our studio we use the ATC100s (a larger more rugged version) in
our editing/CD preparation room. We use a sub-woofer with the ATC
100s in the studio, at home I haven't felt the need for one.
Generally, I found the ATC 50s a more perfectly balanced speaker, but
the 100's have withstood hour after hour of use in a professional
edit room with no component replacement needed in almost 5 years.
Clients like them a lot, too.

Bob Ludwig
President
Gateway Mastering Studios, Inc

Note that this is an old thread before he switched to Eggleston Ivy's at Gateway Mastering. I think he has also used DunTech Sovereigns in the past but I am not sure.

Anyway, hardly suprising that Bob has used a lot of well known respected speakers after all he must use speakers nearly 8 hours a day five days a week. On Artists Direct website Bob has over two thousands credits as audio engineer.

Does it mean that Bob's Ivys are the absolute best or his Andra II surround system is the ultimate, in another league. No I don't think so...but these systems would be damn good choices for anyone and obviously, if not in another league at least up there with the very best; I suspect that all Bob's choices past and present are pretty solid.

"However, are you suggesting that you don't trust/respect the choices of successful mastering engineers that are demanded by top artists and top producers for their critical listening/mastering skills?"

I am saying they shouyld listen to whatever they like, but that doesn't mean you should own the same speakers they do just because they like them.

"Are you suggesting that when they master CD's/SACD's on these speakers that you can dramatically improve on the sound they produce by using another speaker at home?"

they will sound different, but you dont buy speakers because stuff is mastered on them. records were mixed on jbl's in the 70's a lot and ns10's a lot in the 80's but most people I know wouldn't listen on those.

it's not just speakers either, they have particular rooms, crossovers and amps.

"If you say that their taste is for too detailed and precise of a presentation and that you prefer a laid back warm colored sound ....then I understand completely and you have a good point."

no, i like as neutral as possible for work and usually for pleasure. Nothing is really neutral though. I haven;t heard the Ivy's just the Andrea's. I liked them fine but they lack in the lower bass region because of their physical size.

I never heard a wilson that i thought had accurate bass. But, there have been many iterations of wilsons and they are room dependent as well.

My point basically is that you should use what you like. People mix or master or listen to what they are used to. I would take the duntechs over the wilson's any day for phase coherency and flat reponse, but that's my taste too.

I have been in a lot of mastering studios and I just think the systems there, like ours at home, are very personal. O mentioned doug sax, because I am not the only person I know that can't make sense out of his system. The fact that he can is all that really matters.